Mounted Combat and other questions

[karash]

Can someone please help me with some questions?

1. Regarding mounted combat, I realize that the rider moves on the mounts action, but does the mount still get its standard action, such as if I charge while mounted, can BOTH the rider and the mount attack?

2. There is a Ride check called "Fight with Warhorse: If the character directs a war-trained mount to attack in battle, the character can still make the character's own attack or attacks normally. (DC10)" Please explain.

Does this mean that whenever I want BOTH the rider and the mount to attack the same round, I need to pass this check? If the check if failed, does that mean ONLY the mount can attack?

3. There is a Ride check called "Cover: The character can react instantly to drop down and hang alongside the mount, using it as one-half cover. The character can't attack or cast spells while using the character's mount as cover. If the character fails, the character doesn't get the cover benefit. (DC15)"

Does this mean that whenever the rider is attacked, he can simply make this ride check for cover or is this something that has to be declared on his turn? If this is so, why state that the character can't attack - couldn't he attack on his turn and just cover whenever he is attacked?

4. What is the threatened area of a rider without a reach weapon given the rider is considered on the "back" of the mount? Does the rider still threaten the seven adjacent squares around the "back" square of the mount (omitting the front square of the mount) or does the rider having his back to certain squares considered? Does the mount threaten all 10 squares around it?

5. When is the rider flanked? Does the "back" square of the mount have to be flanked or can any part of the mount be flanked to consider the rider flanked?

6. Regarding Total Defense, the PHB states that you only move your speed and get +4 dodge bonus to your AC. Does "move your speed" allow for a double move - the example combat sequence in the Sword and Fist appendix suggests that it does?

Thanks much.

 

[Wippit Guud]

1. This answer to this depends on the outcome of question 2.

2. If you make your mount fight, and want to fight yourself, you're basically using just your legs to hang on. It's DC 10 roll to hold on, cause the mounth will be rearing and biting and such. If you fail the check, you have to use your hands, so you can't fight.

3. Using the mount for cover is a full attack option, as I read it. Move (drop down) and standard (hang on). You can't do it when you're being attacked, because you can't make a non-free action outside your turn.

4. Rider and Mount, as far as I'm aware, threaten every square the mount threatens (within reason, riding a dragon wouldn't let the rider threaten anything at all, unless it's a giant or something).

5. Any part of the mount can be flanked to flank the rider.

6. I don't know the answer to 6.

 

[Stalker0]

I agree with whippit. I actually was just writing to disrupt whippit's answer to number 4, when I realized that with no face rule the rider can always get into position to attack the target when the horse can as far as I know. This is one of the things that will be cleared up in 3.5 thank god.

 

[pvandyck]

Here's the way it works in my game:

1. Yup, during a charge, both you and the mount get 1 attack, provided you make the check (DC 10)

2. You have it exactly.

3. I read to say you can do it anytime you are attacked. Make the check, and you get cover (from the horse, which may be hit instead). I take the "Can't attack" verbiage to mean you don't get AOOs, basically, no matter what somebody in your threatened area is doing. I treat it this way cause it seems balanced. The horse would likely get hit instead. I let it happen outside your init, 'cause it says "react instantly". I don't know what Whippit is talking about free actions outside your init. I don't allow anything outside your init except during an AOO. This riding check seems to be the exception.

4. Hmm, never thought about this. I'll go with whippit.

5. Hmm, never thought about this. I'll go with whippit.

6. I read this to only allow a single move. The "your speed" seemed pretty specific. And it seemed to me to you need to be operating carefully and such to be on "total defense". I don't allow much of the splat books in my game, so I didn't know about the example.

Thelbar

 

[pvandyck]

Oh, yeah, don't forget that if, during your attack from the horse, you want the horse to attack, and you want to do something that involves 2 hands (sword and shield or a 2-handed weapon), you need to make the DC 10 check for both of you to go, and a DC 20 check to "guide with knees". Not to mention the DC 20 check (if the horse is not a warhorse) to control the mount in battle. In my game, we did a battle with a bunch of non-warhorses. If you didn't make the DC 20 check, all you could do was move the horse around the battlefield.

Thelbar

 

[Korak]

clarification

1. Yes

2. Yes, you must make the horses attack(s) first if you want the horse to attack. Then you attempt a DC10 ride check, if you fail, you cannot attack. If you succeed, then you may attack. If you wanted to use both hands, you also need to have made a DC5 ride check before your actions.

3. I also read the "react instantly" part to mean you can take this check out of initiative order. If you are successful, you get cover but may not take any other actions... from that point the rules are silent. How long do you get cover? Do you get cover from other attackers? Is an action required to end the effect? I think a fair ruling would be to allow cover from one half the battlefield until the character spends a move equivalent action to right himself in the saddle or fails a ride check(which I would require each round to maintain the position... failure indicating a full round action used to right the character).

Tactically speaking, it is usually not smart to do this as the character usually has much better AC than the mount... not to mention many more hp.

4. The warhorse threatens all 10 squares around it. As to what squares the rider threatens, I look to the descriptions of lances in the PHB and SRD combined with the size of warhorses(5x10) vs warponies(5x5).

From the SRD:

Lance, Heavy or Light: A lance deals double damage when used from the back of a charging mount. A heavy lance has reach of 10 feet. The weapon cannot be used against an adjacent foe. Light lances are primarily for Small riders.

Since the rider of a warhorse is assumed to be in the back square of the mount, he can't attack the front 3 squares of the 10 threatened by the mount, unless he has a reach weapon (such as a heavy lance). Small characters riding on warponies(5x5) need to use light lances if they want their mounts to attack their foes as well.

5. The back square must be flanked to get a flank bonus against the rider. That square is the riders position.

6. If not for your mention of the S&F appendix I would say "no" to a double move without hesitation. However, I will look at that. Even so, I seriously doubt that a double move is allowed. The letter of the rules governing total defense seem pretty clear to me in indicating only a move of up to your speed. Total defense is a standard action, not a partial action. Remember that standard actions are assumed to included a move (which can sometimes be substituted for a MEA).

Other comments:

Regardless of how many hands you want to use to guide the mount, if it isn't trained for war, you need to make a DC20 check at the beginning of each round to keep the mount under control. This is a move equivalent action. If you fail, it takes the full round to gain control of the mount and you may do nothing. If for some reason you are riding a non-war trained mount, I would suggest dismounting at the beginning of combat even if you have a ridiculous ride skill, or you will waste many actions controlling your mount.

 

[Stalker0]

In S&F, there's an excellent example of mounted combat that clears a lot of this stuff up. I highly recoomend it.

 

[karash]

Thanks all for the responses. You all rock!

 

[pvandyck]

Hmm, we play the dc 20 check to control your non-warhorse mount as: do the check, if you fail, you can do nothing but control the horse (aka move the horse's move somewhere on the battlefield). The reason I play it this way is because the wording saying "if you fail, you can do nothing ELSE". To me, this meant you can do nothing other than control your mount. Kinda goes along with the dc10 check for attacking: if you fail, YOU can't attack, but your horse can.

Also, it seemed silly for our 2nd level group (with ride skills checks of +3 or +5) on horses to start a combat, and then not even be able to move anywhere (dc20? wow.). "The enemy is 100 feet away up the road. Looks like they are going to run at you and attack. Init." Is my horse to paniced to move, what?

Thelbar